From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: catalin.marinas@arm.com (Catalin Marinas) Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2015 15:44:15 +0000 Subject: [PATCHv7 2/2] arm64: add better page protections to arm64 In-Reply-To: <54BEAEAE.8010700@codeaurora.org> References: <1421276394-20402-1-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <1421276394-20402-3-git-send-email-lauraa@codeaurora.org> <54B9AC53.8020903@codeaurora.org> <20150120181453.GI25575@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <20150120184054.GJ25575@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> <54BEAEAE.8010700@codeaurora.org> Message-ID: <20150121154414.GF6358@e104818-lin.cambridge.arm.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 07:38:22PM +0000, Laura Abbott wrote: > On 1/20/2015 10:40 AM, Catalin Marinas wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 20, 2015 at 06:19:23PM +0000, Kees Cook wrote: > >> If, however, only the name is stopping it from landing in arm64, then > >> I don't care what it's called. ;) > > > > Apart from couple of comments on this latest series, the patches look > > fine to me. > > Did that message get sent out? I don't see it in my inbox. Not from me, from Mark Rutland (and the acks from Ard). > > One question for Laura though: have the patches been tested it with: > > > > - 4-levels and 4KB pages? > > - 3-levels and 64KB pages? > > Yes, just re-verified once again that both 4 level 4K pages and 3 level > 64K pages work with this series. Thanks. -- Catalin